GOG Celebrates 10 Years Of Competing With Piracy And Being DRM Free By Saying So
from the doing-it-right dept
In gamer circles, Good Old Games, or GOG, is everybody’s favorite go-to retort whenever someone brings up the necessity for DRM. While the platform has always been something of a kid brother to Valve’s Steam, GOG has made a name for itself by refusing to allow DRM on any titles it sells and, more importantly, being hyper-engaged with its customers and community and fostering that relationship by being genuinely open and human. What many people might not know, however, is that GOG first started in Europe, trying to figure out how to compete with piracy and the grey market long before it waged its war on DRM.
Well, GOG is taking a moment to remind everyone of that fact while celebrating its 10 year anniversary.
The GOG.COM story began in Poland, 1994 – a time and place where bootlegging reigned supreme and legal games were a luxury that few could afford. These were the early days of CD PROJEKT – back then specializing in local retail distribution, but the job wasn’t easy. After all, how do you compete with the grey market?
Our answer was to offer value that gamers were already used to and then some: beloved games in big beautiful boxes packed with goodies, professional localization, and prices that are simply reasonable. And it worked!
It did indeed. In fact, the story of GOG’s anniversary is the story of one platform successfully competing with free, with a much bigger competitor, and having to drag wary publishers that might be scared off of the anti-DRM stance along for the ride… for ten years. For a decade now, GOG has built a business that started and is still largely centered around retro-games that are easily pirated in the video game industry of all places, where customers are far more likely to know the methods for piracy than in other industries. And, yet, here they are, retelling how it filled the market for retro-games by assuming many people actually still wanted developers to be rewarded for great game-making.
Good Old Games launches in open beta as a legal way to support classics at affordable prices. No longer abandoned, all games would come with tech support and sorcery to get them running on modern PCs. Every game stuffed with goodies and bonus content that tickles our inner collectors. Everything would be DRM-free – it’s only fair after all, and it captures that feeling of ownership on your digital shelf.
And it was both that catering to the public demand for valid and working versions of these games, and of course the stripping out of frustrating DRM, that built up GOG’s loyal following. It was merely a few years later when GOG was the platform for several major title day 1 releases, all of which had to follow the anti-DRM “ideology”, as GOG puts it. That there is an honest to God DRM-free option is the full response to any publisher that insists DRM is must-have.
Filed Under: copyright, drm, drm-free, good old games, piracy, video games
Companies: gog, good old games
Comments on “GOG Celebrates 10 Years Of Competing With Piracy And Being DRM Free By Saying So”
A gentle reminder
DRM (initialism for “Digital Rights Management”) — noun — closed-source black box code that gives control of at least part of a given electronic device to the company that either owns or operates the DRM code; the digital equivalent of an ankle bracelet tracking device for paying customers that does nothing to prevent copyright infringement by non-paying customers; a stupid fucking idea
Re: A gentle reminder
Digital Restrictions Management is more appropriate name for it. It doesn’t manage rights, it takes them away.
DRM
DRm means you don’t own what you bought. You can’t copy it, resell it, or use it where you want to without permission.
DRM is designed to encourage pirating the software – only the cracked versions work right.
GOG shows that DRM isn’t a necessary business model.
blue boy isn’t going to like this, is he? He hates it when people compete with piracy.
…you guys, blue basically admitted to being the biggest pirate!
Happy birthday, GOG!
Signed,
an ex-pirate with over 350 games in their GOG account.
Kudos to GOG for advancing DRM-free gaming and happy birthday!
By the way, they have a major giveaway to celebrate – Shadow Warrior 2. The promised Linux version never came out, but it works nicely in Wine+dxvk on Linux.
The implied Boolean argument:
1. One company did okay despite piracy
2. Therefore, copyright law is unnecessary
Doesn’t fly. Without copyright law individual creators will make more restrictive content that is available only to their patrons.
we tried it without copyright law, and the result was…copyright law. We also tried making rape, robbery and murder legal and that led to laws against those things.
Don’t like something? Don’t steal it. If you do steal it, don’t expect to be taken seriously by those from whom you are stealing.
Re: Re:
The implied Boolean argument:
1. Copyright law equals DRM
Doesn’t fly. Because it’s not.
Re: Response to: Jon Smith on Oct 4th, 2018 @ 10:35pm
_If you do steal it, don’t expect to be taken seriously by those from whom you are stealing._
what is this i don’t even
Re: Re:
I thought you got your big brother to beat Mike up. What’s the matter pussy?
Re: John*
Re: Re:
I don’t think you read the same article I did. See, the point of this article is that DRM is unnecessary. Doesn’t mention copyright law anywhere.
Re:
You have either intentionally misstated the argument for your own selfish purposes or you possibly refused to read the post. Either way, this ridiculous assertion displays a profound ignorance on your part.
Have you heard of Patreon? Lots of artists who use that service already (try to) restrict their content to patrons. (Leaks happen.)
“We’ve always done it this way” is not a good enough excuse to keep copyright alive in its current form—or to further expand it in ways that benefit only a few media conglomerates.
[citation needed]
If copyright infringement were theft—and the Supreme Court said it is not—you might have had a point.
Re: Re:
Flawed argument here. Claim: One company did okay despite piracy therefore copyright law is unnecessary.
Rebuttal: Others have already pointed out that the article in question isn’t about copyright. But the entire premise of the claim is wrong in the fact that SEVERAL examples exist where companies have successfully competed with free.
Re: Re: Re:
A typical argument with these people. Every single time a company is successful without depending on DRM and the like, they’re an anomaly, or an exception that proves the rule. Yet, the thousands of companies that fail every year despite depending on restrictive copyright should in no way be taken as an indication of a flaw in copyright itself. Also, questioning any part of current copyright law must mean that you want to abolish everything, there can be no fixes or shades of grey in a solution.
It must be fun living in a way where reality can be whatever you decide it is at one given moment with no mind paid to consistency or logic.
Re: Re:
Watch this video on the Prusa factory, and search ‘Prusa I3’ on Amazon, noting that Josef Prusa makes all his hardware designs and software contribution open source. Explain why his business is expanding without him maintaining exclusive control over his IP.
Re: Re:
Oh, we already tried making robbery legal. It’s called asset forfeiture.
Also, you missed the “h” in your name, Grammar Nazi.
Re: Re:
“The implied Boolean argument:”
Well, it’s certainly better than the implied boolean argument that you idiots tend to push.
“Without copyright law individual creators will make more restrictive content that is available only to their patrons.”
…which will then get operated by the non-patrons you outright refused to sell to once the DRM you foiled upon the legal purchasers inevitably gets broken.
You really haven’t learned a damn thing people are really doing, have you?
“We also tried making rape, robbery and murder legal and that led to laws against those things.”
Those things also not only have demonstrable ill effects on society, but they have high standards of proof, due process and the ability to defend yourself and appeal after the fact. You know, the things you people demand are not available to people when you accuse them of piracy despite usually having little to no real evidence.
Also, you know what else was tried? Prohibition. Guess how that turned out.
“Don’t like something? Don’t steal it”
I don’t. Then, idiots like you try to block me from accessing the content I want, try to stop me from using the stuff I have paid for in the way I wish, and then lie about me and pretend I pirate anyway.
Again, if only you’d identify yourself so I don’t accidentally give you any money instead of to someone who deserves it.
Re: Re: Re:
“get operated by the non-patrons”
Operated? That should say obtained..
Re: Re: Re:
Again, if only you’d identify yourself so I don’t accidentally give you any money instead of to someone who deserves it.
That assumes they’ve ever created anything that was for sale, rather than just lied about it, and given how dishonest they are I really doubt that to be the case.
I imagined something like this to replace the original Napster (thanks for nothing metallica!), but instead of free uploads and downloads, I would charge a $1 dollar for all uploads (including remixes like you find on SoundCloud) and give some of the profits to the respective record companies/publishers.
I don’t know if this would have worked financially or legally (ESPECIALLY LEGALLY).
(<legal>I own all rights to this idea from now until the end of time</legal>)
GOG (or if not on GOG, itch.io releases) is vastly preferable to DRM-locked Steam. On top of Steam’s unnecessary and clunky social media features, having a library of games DRM locked that also requires periodic internet access to validate and play is really not ideal for gamers.
Re: Re:
Then you would be in the minority of gamers, if you even are one. The vast majority of gamers use Steam and largely don’t have any issues with it.
Steam does not do DRM, that’s still up to publishers and devs to implement. You can absolutely post a DRM-free game to steam, Steam just doesn’t have a policy about it like GOG does.
I won’t deny I wouldn’t mind all my games on Steam being DRM free, but that doesn’t mean that GOG is vastly preferable to it, or that it isn’t ideal.
So don’t use them.
Not all games require this. I don’t think even most games require this. Despite that, if you don’t have an internet connection, how are you using GOG and Steam anyway? Your argument is invalid.
Re: Re: Re:
I would wager that a majority of gamers do have issues with Steam, but the service’s benefits outweigh its issues to a tolerable point for those gamers.
Steam is arguably a form of DRM in and of itself.
Then ask Valve to make DRM-free games a Steam standard rather than a mere option.
As far as I know, GOG does not require you to have an Internet connection for the purpose of periodic check-ins with the service. GOG is a marketplace, not a front end for running games purchased through the site.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Fair argument, I could see both ways. I personally don’t have any issue with Steam. Most of my issues come from devs who put DRM into their games or otherwise do bad things with their code.
How so? As far as I know if a game is put on steam without DRM Steam doesn’t require any check-ins or add additional DRM. Though I think they do offer some if requested.
Not a bad idea but, as I said, I don’t have a problem with Steam as is. But it’s a good suggestion, I may do that.
Steam is no different in this regard. It’s easier in some cases to launch games through their front-end but not required. You can launch the games using just the executables, and at least for older games (I think new ones too) will place shortcuts on your desktop or start menu, just like if you installed it from a disk in the old days.
Nor do a lot of those older games require you to have an internet connection to check in with Steam’s servers to keep playing them. You can download games to your hard drive, yank the internet and play to your heart’s content offline.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Sigh, here we go again.
When a game has DRM, the client is the one acting as the DRM. "But some games don’t need the client to launch!" does not make the client any less of a DRM.
I could be the regular visitor of an internet cafe, or am allowed to visit GOG through my company’s internet connection. Or through a friend’s PC. The beauty with GOG is that internet is never a factor after you obtain the game installer; while Valve’s landfill would raise a stink…definitely not a pun I swear.
I lost the internet once for months, with the games I got from Valve’s landfill being unplayable and offline mode broken. The games that did work were GOG’s.
Your game times are logged whether or not you want to. You can’t completely disable a profile like on GOG (which makes your profile link lead to a 404, just like that). If you use chat and have friends, the games you play are always broadcasted; so your friends know you’re playing HuniePop. Most of these can be mitigated with GOG and DRM-free media in general.
GOG is vastly preferable in that you don’t need to ask if a game requires the client’s DRM or not; all games on GOG are DRM-free. On the landfill, the fact that you know which games have Denuvo is a luxury the companies bestowed you – it is not mandatory to disclose third-party DRM usage, and even then it is almost always used only to say "this game uses more DRM than the basic client DRM.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
I’m not going to touch on the DRM side of things for this, but:
>So don’t use them.
>Your game times are logged whether or not you want to. You can’t completely disable a profile like on GOG (which makes your profile link lead to a 404, just like that). If you use chat and have friends, the games you play are always broadcasted; so your friends know you’re playing HuniePop. Most of these can be mitigated with GOG and DRM-free media in general.
So your answer to “don’t use them” is you can disable it and if you ignore that and use it anyway people can see (despite there being an offline/sign out from chat mode)? Come on…
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
And what about when the game doesn’t have DRM? Then what is the client doing?
Regardless of that, this is just faulty logic. If I write a batch script or .NET interface as a client to launch my games, it doesn’t automatically become DRM, or act like DRM. It’s just a different way to launch my games. The Steam client is no different. As evidenced by the fact that you can add non-steam games to your library and launch them from the client. It doesn’t automatically add DRM to those games.
Neither does it automatically make it DRM. The client has absolutely nothing to do with DRM. DRM only comes into play if the developer chooses to use a third party DRM, or use Steam’s built-in DRM wrapper. But both of those options are OPTIONAL. Steam doesn’t DRM protect games by default.
And the same is true for DRM-free games on Steam as well as DRM protected games on Steam that don’t require an internet check-in. What’s your point?
Then those specific games required internet check-in or, no offense, you were doing something wrong. Steam does not require internet check-in for all games on the platform. Otherwise Offline Mode wouldn’t even be a thing. It’s game specific.
Not if you are in offline mode.
You can set your profile to private which basically does the same thing. (Instead of a 404, I think it either tells you you can’t see it or just doesn’t return results)
Again, not if you are in offline mode and Steam always allowed you to hide your status from your friends, and they now rolled out the ability to go invisible, but still be online.
That would be a personal preference and really not all that relevant to Steam either.
How is that different than buying a game through ANY OTHER MEDIUM? This was the same 15 years ago when you went and bought the game disk from Walmart or Bestbuy. You still had no clue what DRM was on it and it had nothing to do with Steam.
No, it’s really not. As I explained above, Steam’s client doesn’t wrap games in DRM by default. That’s a developer decision.
Hey Tim!
Aren’t you supposed to admit you were paid a copy of Shadow Warrior 2 for this review? 😛
Re: Re:
And John Smith got a copy of Shadow Warrior 2 as well – Smith is shilling for GoG! 🙂
Re: Re:
I was paid one for reading it, so why not 😉
Also, it’s worth noting that despite me having been a member of GoG for much of the last 10 years and having been given many free games there, I also buy games – both though GoG and elsewhere. I’ve even bought games I already own for numerous reasons!
Why, it’s almost as if it is a live demonstration of why the regular trolls are wrong about real life..
I love their service. Many of the games which I still had CD-ROMs for I rebought. Even though I could configure DOSbox for each game on my own, They had the configurations optimized for each game plus a lot of the extras including manuals and other paperwork that came with the game.
I love GOG but I sure wish their Linux support was better.
Re: Linux Support
It’s not that GOG doesn’t support Linux (they offer many titles that do). GOG is not the decider on if a title will support Linux or not — it’s the developers who create the games that make that choice.
Re: Re: Linux Support
There are many games that have native Linux versions but which are Windows-only on GOG. The Saints Row series, for example, has Linux-native versions; they’re available on Steam but not on GOG.
Further, GOG’s Galaxy client is only available for Windows. This means that if you’re a Linux user, you don’t get cloud saves, automatic updates, access to betas, or access to online multiplayer in games that use the Galaxy API to implement it.
Re: Re: Re: Linux Support
Correction: GOG Galaxy is available for Windows and Mac.
Re: Re: Re:2 Linux Support
Without an explanation from GOG, there’s no way to know, but I strongly suspect it’s one of two reasons:
1. The linux versions may well have different rightsholders than the Windows version. There may be a sticking point in getting the rights.
2. Unlike steam, GOG is a curated store, and they support all their games. That means that each game they sell will also cost them over time in support. It has to make economic sense to sell a game there (i.e. the numbers they sell need to cover the support cost,) or they lose money on it overall.
My bet is on 2 being the major problem. There just aren’t enough linux gamers, much as I’d wish otherwise.
Re: Re: Re:3 Linux Support
That doesn’t explain the lack of a Linux version of GOG Galaxy, though; the same games are available for Linux both with and without the client.
Also, wouldn’t they still need to support the game on Linux under Wine, whether they have a Linux-native version available or not? The support might be more limited, but it seems to me there’d still be a cost there, and quite possibly enough of one for the difference to be relatively minimal.
Re: Re: Re:4 Linux Support
Wine is much better than it used to be — however getting games to work is quite a bit of work often with bugs
GOG is under no obligation to support games intended for Windows that are running under Wine.
I’m a software developer and use Linux exclusively. On GOG I ordered and paid for Divinity: Original Sin 2 (which only runs under Windows). I tried to get this to work using Wine and after about 6 hours I gave up. GOG gave me a refund without any problems. What a great company. I refuse to buy anything from Steam ing pile of crap.
Re: Re: Re:4 Linux Support
“Also, wouldn’t they still need to support the game on Linux under Wine, whether they have a Linux-native version available or not?”
No, they really wouldn’t, just as they wouldn’t need to support anyone trying to run it on XP or OSX Snow Leopard if it’s not listed as a supported OS. They specify the supported OSes for every title, and would be under no obligation to support anything not listed.
They may agree to help anyway, but then it’s likely that if the game was able to work correctly under Wine, they’d be supplying that version in the first place.